kaal:claim:kaal-2013-acomparativeperspectiveo-014

The German ARAG/Garmenbeck holding is diametrically opposed to In re Citigroup, where the Delaware Chancery Court declared that directors' incorrect evaluation of business risk did not violate the duty of oversight.

Source quote, verbatim

This holding is diametrically opposed to the holding in In re Citigroup where the Delaware Chancery Court declared that directors' incorrect evaluation of business risk did not violate directors' duty of oversight.

From

Kaal, A Comparative Perspective on the Limitations of the Duty of Oversight – A Comment on Lisa Fairfax (2013), A Comparative Perspective on the Duty to Monitor, p. 6
· source PDF

Cite as

Kaal, A Comparative Perspective on the Limitations of the Duty of Oversight – A Comment on Lisa Fairfax (2013)

Holds when

comparison of German and Delaware case law on business risk

Classification

empiricalsupport: arguedrisk-and-incentivescorporate-governance

Related claims

extends kaal:claim:1558614-027 In In re Citigroup the Delaware Court of Chancery refused to extend the Caremark oversight duty, which concern...

Verify

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is ac5c955fe01209c54c78c4575c0b8bf570e5f1259c3f855510697cf51a32e59a. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/c14e865ba2854a6d...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/kaal-2013-acomparativeperspectiveo-014.md | sha256sum